I've been thinking about this issue a lot, mainly because I've been hearing about it in the press so much.

Let me share just a few of my thoughts with you.

This whole issue revolves around “marital boundaries”. Just who should be allowed to marry, and under what circumstances? The Bible frequently gets mentioned as promoting the “one man, one woman” model of marriage in contrast with the same gender unions that are being suggested as an addition to this model, or expansion of these boundaries.

While I do not wish to get into a prolonged discussion of homosexuality, one thing I would like to share with you is my understanding of what the Bible has to say about marital boundaries. Basically I would explain it this way. The acceptable boundaries for marriage within the Bible and within the history of our faith, have a tendency of contracting or expanding according to the spirit's leading and human need. This is my theory. And it is only a theory.. but allow me to explain and give some examples.

In some parts of the Bible, the boundaries for marriage were very constricted. Jews in the Old Testament books of Ezra and Nehemiah, were instructed to not marry outside their own race. If a woman was not of Jewish descent, she was not acceptable for marriage (see Nehemiah 10:30, 13:1-3, 13:23-31, and Ezra 9:1-4 and Ezra 10:1-15). This may sound harsh, but consider the circumstances, the human need. In Ezra and Nehemiah's day the Jews were very few in number and in danger of extinction . Drastic circumstances called for drastic measures! The spirit's leading helped preserve a people, a culture, and a religion that the whole world has benefited greatly from. The boundaries of marriage contracted according to the spirit's leading and human need.

In other parts of the Bible, we see these same boundaries being opened up or expanded. In the Old Testament book of Ruth, the spirit seems to suggest that non-Jewish women might make wonderful wives for Jewish men. The Old Testament book of Ruth is the story of a Moabite woman who marries into a Jewish family and becomes a shining example of faithfulness to God and devotion to neighbor. The boundaries for marriage expand and open up in the book of Ruth, while these same boundaries for marriage contract in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Isn't that interesting?

Race is just one example of marital boundaries expanding and contracting in the Bible. Another example can be found in the number of partners allowed in marriage. We take for granted the “one woman, one man” model for marriage demonstrated in Adam and Eve. In the Bible however, many of the faithful heroes we study about in Sunday school were into the “one man, many women” model of marriage! Abraham, Jacob, Esau, Gideon, King Saul, King David, and King Solomon, all these and many other Biblical heroes of the faith had multiple wives. We do not see the prophets confronting such persons on this marital boundary or identifying it as sinful. Why was polygamy accepted in Biblical times but not today?

Here's my theory again! In the ancient world, many young men died from war, disease or just plain working themselves to death. We should also remember that women were not allowed to work outside the home and were not allowed to own property. Polygamy may have been the spirit's way of dealing with an oversupply of young marriageable women who had no way of supporting themselves.

In Deuteronomy 25:5-10 we see a similar practice in which a man was required to marry and care for his brother's widow and children. According to Deuteronomy 25 as well as Matthew 22, this practice was God's will and was to be obeyed by both the brother-in-law and sister-in-law. It seems strange to us today, yet in an age in which there was no life insurance, no social security, or welfare safety net, this may have been the spirit's way of providing for widows and their children. Again, drastic circumstances called for drastic measures! The acceptable boundaries for marriage expanded according to the spirit's leading and human need. Now bear in mind, this is just a theory, but I think it does make some sense.

There are many other marital practices in the Bible that we might question today. The vast majority of marriages in Bible times were “arranged marriages”. In the book of Genesis it was not uncommon for men to marry a second cousin or even their half sister (see Genesis 20:12 and Gen 24) The boundary of the appropriate age for marriage has changed greatly since Bible times or even since the days of our great, great grandparents.

Most of these changes took place over hundreds if not thousands of years, often without our even realizing it. Yet sometimes, things change very rapidly. Martin Luther lived in a time when clergy were not allowed to marry. The Biblical examples of the unmarried Jesus and St. Paul inspired church leaders to require all church leaders to be single. Martin Luther and the reformation changed that. But take note, this change in marital boundaries has been accepted by only half this world's Christians!

God might be the same from age to age, but the world we live in keeps changing. And the boundaries in marriage? If we really study the Bible and the history of our faith, we will see that some of the boundaries in marriage change with time and circumstance, while other boundaries remain the same. Life long faithfulness seems to be a boundary that is enduring. Love and respect for your partner seems to be enduring. Caring for your partner in sickness and health, in good times and bad times seems to be an enduring boundary. And gender? Male and female seems to be approved, appropriate, and wonderfully celebrated from one end of the Bible to the other!

What then about same gender unions? Some Christians say, “Such unions are identified as sinful in the Bible. How can you argue with that?” (see Leviticus 20:13 and Romans 1:26-27) Other Christians say, “But our understanding of homosexuality has changed. The practices we are speaking of are not the same as those addressed in the Bible.” Should we expand the boundaries of marriage to include same gender unions or pass laws that prohibit them?

It is your responsibility as good Lutherans to study both perspectives, and make your decision guided by the Word and the Spirit. What I hope to have shown you, is that marital boundaries and practices are not static. They have changed greatly over the years, both in the Bible and within our faith. They have evolved according to human need and divine wisdom. And part of that process is divine, part of that process is human. God's spirit is always leading, but human beings are called to “discern” that leading.

I hope you will give this issue not just a nod of assent or rejection, but your full attention. Do not what your pastor says, or what the dominant culture says, but what your heart and faith tell you. Study your Bible, pray your prayers, and then vote in November, knowing that even if you are wrong, God's good and gracious way, will eventually prevail. That is one thing we can count on, the one thing we can be sure of!

Pastor from my hometown church.

As a gay person, thank you for sharing that story Super it was extremely thoughtful and inspiring.

Honestly, I needed to see that again. Just what the doctor ordered, thank you.

So I am on the Romney/Ryan mailing list and get their emails every single day. I do this to get perspective from both sides, and for the first time this morning it looks like they might be a little bit on tilt:

I wanted to vote third party, but Gary Johnson isn't on the Michigan ballot. I can't get behind the rest of the third party candidates at all.

I'm not really a huge fan of Romney, but I'm 100% certain that another 4-years of Obama will be very bad for this country. Is voting for somebody I don't care for worth it if the end result is a vote against the worst president we've had in decades?

I thought about not voting, but I just can't not vote. What to do?
------------------------------

You can have an opinion, just be prepared to be relentlessly mocked for it.

Parasite:This is true, they do influence the way the candidates campaign. What this really illustrates is how the media has everyone under their thumb.

The thing that's over-the-top this time is the *amount* of polls. I remember when I was younger it seemed that the polls only came out every couple/few weeks. There would be a news story about how the poll would be coming out tomorrow. Now there is a poll every minute which is out of control.

I wanted to vote third party, but Gary Johnson isn't on the Michigan ballot. I can't get behind the rest of the third party candidates at all.

I'm not really a huge fan of Romney, but I'm 100% certain that another 4-years of Obama will be very bad for this country. Is voting for somebody I don't care for worth it if the end result is a vote against the worst president we've had in decades?

I thought about not voting, but I just can't not vote. What to do?

I always thought you lived in Texas. Weird lol.

Honestly though all your talk about 3rd party *generally* at the end of the day usually translates to a republican vote if a 3rd party voter decides to go mainstream. Just vote for Romney, your state is blue anyway.